Genesis402

Counterparty report: company, parents, sanctions verdict

genesis402_counterparty_report

Screen a company before you deal with it: resolve its LEI or legal name, trace parents, and check the group against UN, OFAC, EU and UK sanctions lists for a clear, review or stop verdict.

Instructions

Paid ($0.25 USDC). Check one company before you deal with it. Resolves the company in the GLEIF register (name or 20-character LEI), follows its registered direct and ultimate parent, and screens every name in that group against the UN, US OFAC SDN, EU and UK sanctions lists. Returns one verdict (clear, review or stop) with every reason sourced, the registry record, the group screened, the list versions used, an Ed25519-signed receipt, a private link to a branded PDF (7 days) and a public verify page. A vague name (e.g. a bare brand) returns review and names the entity it assumed. Screening and registry signals only: not KYC, not a compliance determination, not legal advice. Payment: call once without payment_signature to get the exact price quote (nothing is charged or signed), then call again with the signed payment to receive the result and settlement details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	No	Optional. Used only when no registry record is found and the name is screened as given.
`query`	Yes	Company legal name (3 to 200 characters) or its 20-character LEI. The exact legal name or LEI gives the most precise result.
`payment_signature`	No	Optional. An x402 v2 payment you signed for this call's quote (the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value). Omit to get the price quote first; nothing is charged without it.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	Yes	QUOTE_ONLY: price quote only, nothing signed or charged. PAID: the call was paid and result holds the data. FREE: the endpoint answered without payment.
`paid`	Yes	true only when a payment was settled for this call.
`price`	No	The Base USDC quote. Present on QUOTE_ONLY and on PAID calls made by a local payer; null when the rail offered no Base USDC lane or the caller signed the payment.
`result`	No	PAID or FREE: the endpoint's JSON result.
`resource`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: the full URL of the paid resource.
`how_to_pay`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: how to sign and resend the call.
`settlement`	No	PAID: decoded PAYMENT-RESPONSE settlement (transaction hash, network, payer), or null if the rail sent none.
`what_you_get`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: the rail's description of what the payment buys.
`payment_required_b64`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: the raw base64 PAYMENT-REQUIRED header, to sign with any x402 v2 client.
`also_accepted_networks`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: every network the 402 challenge accepts.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.3.6Oct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only give readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description carries the real behavioral load, disclosing the $0.25 USDC price, the two-step payment handshake, the possible verdicts (clear/review/stop), the signed receipt, the 7-day PDF link and the public verify page. It also explains how vague names behave (returns review and names the assumed entity).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with what the tool does and its price, then the pipeline, then the outputs, then caveats, then payment mechanics. Dense but every sentence carries information; only marginal trimming would be possible.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a paid, multi-step, composite tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description covers inputs, pipeline, outputs, limits and payment flow completely. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents query (legal name or 20-char LEI), type, and payment_signature. The description adds behavioral context (vague names, quote-first flow) but no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Check one company', 'Resolves the company in the GLEIF register... follows its registered direct and ultimate parent, and screens every name in that group'). This is clearly distinguished from siblings like genesis402_sanctions_name_screen and genesis402_company_lookup because it is a composite registry+group-screening+verdict tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a clear context ('Check one company before you deal with it') and explicit exclusions ('not KYC, not a compliance determination, not legal advice'), plus a precise payment call-flow (call once without payment_signature for a quote, then again with the signed payment). It does not name sibling alternatives explicitly, so it falls just short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.